Captive power transfer pricing and non-resident export commission rules support deletion of adjustments and withholding disallowance in discussed proc...
Cooperative society deposits, member-interest TDS exemption and credit-facility deduction claims require verification through records and supporting e...
Customs jurisdiction over EPCG condition breaches survives export-obligation discharge certificates, requiring alleged fraud and misdeclaration to be ...
Contractual tolerance requires consideration; breach recoveries, qualifying public infrastructure services and road works escape service tax liability...
The High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned judgment of the Single Judge. The court held that to avail the Budgetary Support Scheme (BSS), the concerned unit must be located in the specified areas mentioned in the 2007 and 2017 notifications, producing specified goods cleared from the same units. The intent of the BSS pivoted around the geographical location of the unit, and the benefit was to accrue to those units for the residual period. Despite a change in name or acquisition of a new unit within Sikkim, there was no change in the geographical location of the units existing in Sikkim prior to the GST regime. The court observed that the appellants' anxiety regarding eligibility remained unaddressed, and no decision was taken by the DPIIT concerning their eligibility.
The High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned judgment of the Single Judge. The court held that to avail the Budgetary Support Scheme (BSS), the concerned unit must be located in the specified areas mentioned in the 2007 and 2017 notifications, producing specified goods cleared from the same units. The intent of the BSS pivoted around the geographical location of the unit, and the benefit was to accrue to those units for the residual period. Despite a change in name or acquisition of a new unit within Sikkim, there was no change in the geographical location of the units existing in Sikkim prior to the GST regime. The court observed that the appellants' anxiety regarding eligibility remained unaddressed, and no decision was taken by the DPIIT concerning their eligibility.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.